Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on a Community immigration policy.

Legal base:



Document originated:

22 November 2000

Forwarded to the Council:

24 November 2000

Deposited in Parliament:

4 December 2000

Department:

Home Office

Basis of consideration:

EM of 18 December 2000

Previous Committee Report:

None

To be discussed in Council:

No date set

Committee's assessment:

Politically important

Committee's decision:

Recommended for debate in Standing Committee C

Background

3.1 This Communication is a response to
the call for a common EU immigration policy, as proposed both
in Article 63 EC, and at the special European Council at Tampere.
A separate Communication, presented at the same time but only
recently deposited in Parliament, addresses a common asylum procedure.

The document

3.2 The aim of the Communication is to stimulate
a debate on the admission and integration of third country nationals
in order to reach a consensus on the objectives of a common EU
immigration policy. It takes a broad view of the subject, including
the effects of emigration on countries of origin and the importance
of integrating third country nationals into Member States.

3.3 The early sections of the document set
out the Tampere framework for a common EU asylum and immigration
policy and record progress to date on partnership with countries
of origin, a common European asylum system, fair treatment of
third country nationals and management of migration flows.

3.4 The document then addresses immigration,
which it divides into three broad categories: humanitarian,
family reunion, and economic migration. It states:

"Any EU immigration
policy needs to take into account migration of all types 
humanitarian, family reunion and economic  and to deal
with the impact on the sending and receiving countries as a whole.
It will need to respond to the difficult political debates taking
place in some countries and will require strong political leadership
to help shape public opinion. In dealing with all types of migration,
it should present an integrated approach, taking account of the
benefits of diversity in society, the need for a balanced framework
of rights and obligations for third country nationals resident
in the Union, the importance of developing support for integration
and the effects on the labour market. The policy should be developed
under a new framework for co-operation at Community level, which
would be based on co-operation, exchange of information, and reporting
and would be co-ordinated by the Commission."

3.5 The Communication focuses on economic
migration (which it says has been close to zero since the 1970s).
It proposes a more flexible approach "based on the recognition
that migratory pressures will continue and that there are benefits
that orderly immigration can bring to the EU, to the migrants
themselves and to their countries of origin". It argues that,
besides meeting the needs of the market place, legal admission
policies for labour migration could help to reduce illegal immigration
(particularly in its worst forms of smuggling and trafficking)
and provide an opportunity to ensure compliance with existing
labour legislation by employers of third country nationals.

3.6 The document emphasises that the responsibility
for determining the needs for different categories of migrant
labour must remain with the Member States. However, it proposes
a new process based on co-operation, information exchange and
reporting, which would require Member States to prepare two-part
periodic reports. The first part would review the development
and impact of the previous period's immigration policy; the second
would set out future intentions, including a projection of labour
migrants to be admitted with an indication of the skills levels
needed. Indicative targets are suggested, rather than any quota
system. The Commission would present a synthesis of reports to
the Council which would then lay down the principles of the common
approach for the next period, taking into account the progress
made in implementing the European Employment Strategy. The Commission
would take on a monitoring and evaluation role.

3.7 The Communication then addresses the
issue of a legal framework for admission, which it summarises
thus:

"The Commission proposes
that a common legal framework for admission of third country nationals
should be developed, in consultation with the Member States, which
would be based on the principles of transparency, rationality
and flexibility. The legal status granted to third country nationals
would be based on the principle of providing sets of rights and
responsibilities on a basis of equality with those of nationals
but differentiated according to the length of stay while providing
for progression to permanent status. In the longer term this could
extend to offering a form of civic citizenship, based on the EC
Treaty and inspired by the Charter of Fundamental Rights, consisting
of a set of rights and duties offered to third country nationals."

3.8 The Commission proposes that the Communication
be widely distributed for debate, the results of which will be
discussed at a conference in the second half of 2001. The conclusions
of the conference will then be presented to the Brussels Council
at the end of 2001, which will also be considering the mid-term
review of the Tampere implementation programme.

The Government's view

3.9 In her Explanatory Memorandum, the Minister
of State at the Home Office (Mrs Barbara Roche) welcomes the Communication
as a "thoughtful basis" for a debate in which the Government
intends to be an active participant. She continues:

"The UK Government has
itself launched a debate on the need for migration policy to match
demographic and social change, ensuring a satisfactory supply
of qualified workers to ensure the development of successful economies.
The Government also recognises that there is a link between legal
migration opportunities and illegal migration pressures, although
this is only part of a wider and complex range of migration issues."

3.10 The Minister sets out the UK position
as follows:

"The Government's approach
to the development of such a common policy will be influenced
by its intention to maintain the United Kingdom's existing frontier
controls, in accordance with its Protocol secured at Amsterdam,
and to participate in measures brought forward under Title IV
of the TEC only where this would not conflict [with] the Government's
stated policy on its participation in Title IV matters. At the
same time, the Government aims to ensure, where appropriate, that
the United Kingdom's immigration policies are broadly in line
with those of other Member States.

"Some areas where we shall seek clarification,
and follow the debate with particular interest, are set out below:

" the Government supports the proposal
that a constructive dialogue with countries of origin and transit
should be an important component of immigration policy. The United
Kingdom plays an active part in the work of the High Level Working
Group on Asylum and Migration which is based on just such a concept;

" the Government notes with interest
the suggestion that, en route to the acquisition of the host State's
nationality, there should be some form of 'civic citizenship'
which carries with it a package of core rights for long-resident
third country nationals. Although nationality itself is a matter
of Member State, not Community, competence, the UK supports measures
to ensure that the rights of long-term, legally resident third
country nationals are broadly comparable to those of the Member
States' own nationals, in order to encourage integration into
the host community;

" the Government endorses wholeheartedly
the principle of fair treatment for third country nationals. But
the Government's participation in this aspect of the debate will
be predicated on the European Council's conclusions, at Tampere,
that rights comparable to those of EU citizens should relate to
rights applicable within their country of residence. The Government
would therefore have difficulty with proposals which granted rights
of residence for such persons in other Member States; and

" the Government fully supports the
proposal that policies on admission should be counterbalanced
by a firm approach to illegal migration [sic], especially in relation
to smuggling and trafficking in human beings."

Conclusion

3.11 We agree with the Minister that
this is a thoughtful document which takes a broad view of migration
issues and puts forward some new and significant proposals. We
consider that, although it is simply a discussion document, it
merits consideration by Parliament, and we therefore recommend
it for debate in European Standing Committee C.

3.12 The Standing Committee may wish
to ask the Minister:

whether she agrees that orderly immigration
can bring benefits to the EU, to the migrants themselves and to
their countries of origin;

whether she favours the process proposed by
the Commission for indicative immigration targets;

what her view is of the suggested "civic
citizenship" for long-resident third country nationals; in
particular:

(i) whether she considers
it necessary, given the duty of Contracting States to the European
Convention on Human Rights to secure to everyone within their
jurisdiction the rights and freedoms set forth within that Convention;
and

(ii) what she considers is
meant by the reference to the Charter of Fundamental Rights in
this context; and

which aspects of the Communication she considers
may conflict with the UK's intention to maintain its existing
frontier controls.